The roles of science, the media, and politics greatly influence public opinion and understanding of the world around us. These three spheres of information and action are invariably linked when discussing complex global issues like climate change. However, the presentation and resolution of disagreement within the three spheres is incredibly independent. The many ways that climate change, specifically the debate on the existence of climate change, is portrayed within these spheres can greatly affect public emotion, knowledge, and policy of such an issue. This is particularly evident in the United States (US) (Boykoff &ump; Boykoff, 2007). This section attempts to briefly outline the portrayal and settlement of the debate on the existence of climate change within the three spheres of the sciences, the media, and politics.
In the field of science, a well defined procedure exists to create scientific debate and controversy. The procedure begins with the scientific method, a generalized series of steps used to collect data and accept or reject hypotheses. It is important to note that the scientific method exists not only to prove ideas, but also to disprove them and to continually build upon understandings. From data collection and interpretation of the results, a synthesis of the experiment and discoveries made are submitted for peer-review. The peer-review process is formal review from other professionals in the scientific community, and is used to attribute credibility and academic quality to an article prior to publishing (UVictoria). Legitimate arguments in the sciences are based on data and, “sustained debate within the broader scientific community” (Egger &ump; Carpi, 2010). Thecontinued interest and skepticism in the scientific community sparks additional research, which fuels attempts to gain a better understanding of an issue. Through research, the scientific method, and peer-review processes, scientists can make concluding statements about an issue. In…